October 2013 portraits

[alex from holland]

I had the honour to make a wet plate portrait of Erwin Olaf.
One of the best Dutch photographers.
More info about that shoot you can find on my weblog:
http://collodion-art.blogspot.nl/2013/07/erwin-olaf-extremely-talented.html

http://upload.pbase.com/image/152662584/original.jpg

26x26cm black glass ambrotype
exposure time 5 seconds
Hermagis 350 mm f 4.5 wide open

[bracan]

I envy you Alex. Erwin is one of my favorite modern photographer! Excellent portrait!!!

[lenser]

Alex,

All I can exclaim is "WOW". Your control of the plane of focus is perfect and the quality of the lighting and the depth of the tonal ranges is just wonderful. Beautiful work in every way.

[Pfiltz]

Lucky.....
^^^^^

[Christo.Stankulov]

Bravo!

[gsinico]

I had the honour to make a wet plate portrait of Erwin Olaf.
One of the best Dutch photographers.
More info about that shoot you can find on my weblog:
http://collodion-art.blogspot.nl/2013/07/erwin-olaf-extremely-talented.html

http://upload.pbase.com/image/152662584/original.jpg

26x26cm black glass ambrotype
exposure time 5 seconds
Hermagis 350 mm f 4.5 wide open


very well done, you have to be proud of that!
Last year I visited an exibition in Milano of Erwin Olaf,
beautiful masterpieces indeed!

[Ari]

Bravo, Alex!

[Dave Aharonian]

Gorgeous portrait Alex! Mind if I ask about what type of lighting you're using? I'm curious about how you're getting a 5 second exposure.

[Ari]

One of my first portraits using a brass lens; it has a wonderful quality, but it's quite difficult to focus.
This was the sharpest of a set of four.

http://i1367.photobucket.com/albums/r790/Ari4000/BB-CSE234_zpsa0d2c40b.jpg (http://s1367.photobucket.com/user/Ari4000/media/BB-CSE234_zpsa0d2c40b.jpg.html)

Toyo 810M, City Sale & Exchange 16" lens, Ilford FP4+, HC-110

[Peter Mounier]

Very nice Ari. I think I can see a fondness for you in her eyes and in her relaxed expression.

[Ari]

Very nice Ari. I think I can see a fondness for you in her eyes and in her relaxed expression.

Thank you, Peter, and I 'ope she's fond of me, I married 'er! :)

[JeRuFo]

One of my first portraits using a brass lens; it has a wonderful quality, but it's quite difficult to focus.
This was the sharpest of a set of four.

Toyo 810M, City Sale & Exchange 16" lens, Ilford FP4+, HC-110

Beautiful. The light in her left eye is just right and with a smile like that you can't go wrong.

[Ari]

Beautiful. The light in her left eye is just right and with a smile like that you can't go wrong.

Why, thank you, JRF!

[jcoldslabs]

http://i1367.photobucket.com/albums/r790/Ari4000/BB-CSE234_zpsa0d2c40b.jpg

What a warm, relaxed and flattering portrait. Same lens + new owner = new style! (That's not to say Scott's portraits weren't warm also. You know what I mean!)

Jonathan

[cuypers1807]

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2863/9691698190_46c739bddb_c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/24021575@N02/9691698190/)
Chamonix 045N-2
Acros 100
150mm

[Ari]

What a warm, relaxed and flattering portrait. Same lens + new owner = new style! (That's not to say Scott's portraits weren't warm also. You know what I mean!)

Jonathan

Thank you, Jonathan; I just wanted to do justice to the lens, given Scott's fine body of work with it.
Much appreciated!

[t0aster]

Probably from around last October but I've only gotten around to scanning them. Portraits of strangers in the pedestrian mall here in Iowa City.

Schneider-Kreuznach Symmar-S 180mm/5.6
4x5 Ilford FP4+
Rodinal 1+100

[Corran]

Developed some chromes tonight! I'm very happy with this one:

Linhof Master Technika
Schneider Xenotar 150mm f/2.8 - shot handheld at f/8, 1/125, with a CPL and 81a
Kodak Ektachrome E100VS
Anime Weekend Atlanta - Sept. 28, 2013

http://www.oceanstarproductions.com/photosharing/awa-1673ss.jpg

[tenderobject]

My first 8x10 shots using X-ray film :D

https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/1385963_718027958210901_633087876_n.jpg https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn2/1157449_718027948210902_606156383_n.jpg

8X0 Kodak Master View, 250mm Fujinon 6.7, Fuji HRT Green, Handcolored in photoshop.

[Ari]

My first 8x10 shots using X-ray film :D

https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/1385963_718027958210901_633087876_n.jpg https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn2/1157449_718027948210902_606156383_n.jpg

8X0 Kodak Master View, 250mm Fujinon 6.7, Fuji HRT Green, Handcolored in photoshop.

Congratulations, t.o. and you finally got your KMV, too.
Very nice start; X-ray film is cheap, but magnifies any errors. Do you have a light leak in the camera/DDS or is it the film?
Anyway, keep it up and keep posting.

[Ari]

Probably from around last October but I've only gotten around to scanning them. Portraits of strangers in the pedestrian mall here in Iowa City.

Schneider-Kreuznach Symmar-S 180mm/5.6
4x5 Ilford FP4+
Rodinal 1+100

Kudos to you for stopping strangers in the street and asking to photograph them; that's the hardest part.
Nice set of portraits.

[tenderobject]

Hi Ari! Yes! After a long wait!!! I'm very happy with it even though it's very heavy for me with my f.64! I have to bring it to my friends studio just to test the camera!

I'm not sure if the holders has leaks i have yet to test it. I'm suspecting that the leaks came from our DIY safe light. It seems that all the exposed sheets (4) has the same leaks.
Hopefully i could test it again soon! I'm very much happy with X-ray film it's like a practise to me for this format. Atleast i'll be aware of errors before going to the real film route..
The characteristic of this film is what i like the most.


Congratulations, t.o. and you finally got your KMV, too.
Very nice start; X-ray film is cheap, but magnifies any errors. Do you have a light leak in the camera/DDS or is it the film?
Anyway, keep it up and keep posting.

[t0aster]

Kudos to you for stopping strangers in the street and asking to photograph them; that's the hardest part.
Nice set of portraits.

Thanks for the kind words! I had a friend with me while I was doing these. She's completely extroverted to my complete introversion, couldn't have done it without her. I plan on doing more stranger portraits and due to schedule differences now I'll be out by myself so we'll see how that goes.

[Mkillmer]

Very serious looking portraits, shot on Fuji HRT X-Ray 8x10.
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7419/10086701815_15ee21daa6_z.jpg

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5532/10094937406_f5568054fc_z.jpg

I'm very curious about how people control hot spots on models when shooting with studio strobes. In these pictures I have used 2 beauty dishes (approx. 40cm size) at about 45 degrees to the model with 2 or 3 stops between them. The beauty dishes are quite close - maybe 1/2 a metre away.
I guess my options are:
different lighting setup
use a soft box
some sort of makeup on the model

Any suggestions?

[JWebb]

Make up - Powder is used to put a matt finish on the skin to tame the hot spots.

[jp]

Very serious looking portraits, shot on Fuji HRT X-Ray 8x10.
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7419/10086701815_15ee21daa6_z.jpg

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5532/10094937406_f5568054fc_z.jpg

I'm very curious about how people control hot spots on models when shooting with studio strobes. In these pictures I have used 2 beauty dishes (approx. 40cm size) at about 45 degrees to the model with 2 or 3 stops between them. The beauty dishes are quite close - maybe 1/2 a metre away.
I guess my options are:
different lighting setup
use a soft box
some sort of makeup on the model

Any suggestions?

Nice tones. I'd try one strobe (close with beauty dish) as close to inline with the camera as possible, as Mortensen described in "Pictorial Lighting". The bottom photo has two hotspots on the nose and two on the forehead, which could be made more natural with simpler lighting. One big softbox can also work, play around with it and a DSLR sometime.

[vinny]

Don't put a strobe on the camera side of the face. Use a bounce card for fill. As already been said, use one strobe.

[SergeiR]

I'm very curious about how people control hot spots on models when shooting with studio strobes. In these pictures I have used 2 beauty dishes (approx. 40cm size) at about 45 degrees to the model with 2 or 3 stops between them. The beauty dishes are quite close - maybe 1/2 a metre away.

Inverse square law. Unless you did insanely good job on makeup - specular highlights from close contrasty light source will give you nasty results. Which is why one of my teachers used to go in huge arguments with me, when i was all about portable strobes and idea of "oh you can just move source closer in".. Took me a while to understand he was right :)

[SergeiR]

8x10, 14 inch heliar, abrasion toning, textured screen (two actually - i got to make some new ones) , print.

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3775/10109462074_af47d546f4_c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/sergeistudio/10109462074/)
Elementary (http://www.flickr.com/photos/sergeistudio/10109462074/) by Sergei Rodionov (http://www.flickr.com/people/sergeistudio/), on Flickr

[lenser]

Looks like this will have to be divided into two segments as it is quite long. Sorry about that .


Okay friends, I am going to purposely step on the toes of more than a few people who have been taught some bad legends about light placement, so here goes.

MK, this is not directed at you as a criticism as I respect the efforts you are making here and the very strong start that you have, so please don't take offense at what I hope will be a good lesson derived from brilliant people who have taught me over more that two decades in my early career.

I don't mean to offend anyone by doing this, but I have seen so many "portraits" on here that came so close only to fall below par due to lack of good lighting. It is frustrating. I don't mean to set myself up as somebody who thinks they are the ultimate in lighting knowledge either, it's just that I've been very lucky to be taught by several true masters and I thank God for it, so I hope what I am about to state is of help, rather than just being critical. Ultimately, what they taught me was to actually SEE light while I was constructing the patterns of light for an image whether by using studio electronic flashes, or window light controlled with flags and reflectors, or outdoor light to be controlled by the wonders of subtractive lighting which is actually deconstructing the light. And by the way, I get upset with myself quite often at not paying proper attention to these subtleties the way that I was taught to do them so I fail often as well.

First, a question for MK.

Are your beauty dishes covered by diffusion socks? If not, they would be hugely helpful in softening and diffusing the light to help eliminate the ridges of highlight you are experiencing.

Now suggestions. Even though it is counter to the correct reasoning that moving lights back farther from the subject makes them smaller in relation to the subject and therefore more specular, it will be beneficial in that the glow you are getting on the ridges of the flesh relative to the flatness in the pockets or hollows because it flattens that distance within the skin surface.

Now a camera position and lens choice question.....nothing to do with lighting. What focal length lens did you use? It looks to be a short normal used much too close or a wide angle with the camera moved in to fill the frame. Either way, unless you intended to distort the face, may I suggest that you use a much longer lens, at least twice the normal focal length. Look at these and you see that the facial features loom forward and the ears regress far away from the features. In reality, the nose is about the same height as the ears or a bit less and here the ears are very tiny and the head is badly distorted. If that's on purpose, great. If it's not, your subject is not going to be happy. To cure this, choose a longer focal length and back that camera away from the face. Tradition calls for a focal length about double what is considered normal for your format.

Back to lighting, and here goes with my challenge to how most of us learned the legends of proper placement of the fill light. I will state right here that I welcome your responses, positive or negative to what I say here as my belief of what this gospel should be, but I ask that you do not challenge me unless and until you try what I say and prove to yourself either way what your preference is. By the way, this is not my original idea of this placement. It was derived from watching Dean Collins and a handful of other lighting masters in seminars and at their work and actually SEEING the light as they worked and recognizing where the lighting units needed to be placed to compliment the face or subject in the image instead of creating distractions.

Also, if you take a put up or shut up position toward what I say, I have to apologize that I can show only medium format work in portraiture so either visit my web site at www.cameraworksassociates.com or I can try to get permission from the moderators for a one time special pass on format used. Either way, you are welcome to critique what you see as you please. I don't expect anyone to agree with me based on just verbiage.

MK you have two main lights at work in these images, not a main and a fill. The reason is their placement, not their power, although they are too close to the same in intensity.


The correct usage of main and fill is quite simple, the fill light in a portrait has one position only. It is NOT on the side opposite the main, EVER! It is not on the side with the main or at least not as a rule although that is a tiny bit better! It is ALWAYS!!!! in line with the nose of the subject....PERIOD!

Why is that the accurate rule? It is very simple. If the fill light is on the side opposite the main (and especially if the exposure setting is too bright) it throws shadows from the nose into the the light areas created by the main light and creates god awful distractions and always widens the nose out of reality.

If it is placed on the same side as the main, much better, but it still may throw an extra edge to the shadow created by the main and distort that shape.

If it is in line with the nose (give or take a few inches), any extra shadows that might be created will fall directly into the same shadow created by the main and so they disappear.

Let's remind ourselves what the fill light is actually supposed to do. But, since it is ALWAYS a subordinate light in a set up, lets first define it's compliment, the main light or key light. Simply put, the key or main has one purpose which is to define the face visually by placing it (the light) so that it throws highlights and shadows where the photographer wants them to lie to display the face the way he or she sees it artistically.

The fill light has one and only one complimentary function and that is to raise the exposure value of the shadows into a printable "zone" on the negative or transparency and within that brightness choice, to place the level at which the photographer wants to set the contrast range for the final image. Period, end of story....that's all folks.

If that light is moved in such a way as to throw shadows of it's own, then it is no longer a fill light and you have created a second main light. Thus, it needs to be placed in line with the nose and set for it's proper exposure value.

(continued below)

[lenser]

Second half:

The only time that placing a fill light in an out-of-position set up may work (iffy at best) is by using an huge (60" or better) umbrella bounce so that the fill becomes omnidirectional across a very wide and soft placement including being in line with the nose. For Example, Photogenic used to make a giant horizontal fill (1970"s?) called the Skylighter(?) which was placed against the back wall of the camera room with power adjusted to the balance desired for the fill exposure. Doesn't sound like a big deal right? Just put it in the middle and blast away. No!!!!!, it could be mounted on a horizontal wall rail system so that it could be moved left or right to be in line with the nose!!!!!! One problem with that large a fill though is that it over lights the side of the face and reduces the three dimensional fall off in to shadow.

So lets further discuss a better and very manageable working process with making lighting choices. Start with the lights off to the side of the camera room and place the subject in the pose you wish. Then FIRST, bring in the main light to define facial shapes and lock it down mentally to that position. Next, bring in the fill and place it in line with the nose and adjust power for your desired exposure and contrast range. Before or after, you can place background or hair lights since they have no direct effect on the facial shadows, only on back ground/subject separation. Now study the face for two things. One is simply to notice that the fill light placement in line with the nose has another benefit besides shadow and exposure control. It also allows for a gradual fall off, a sculptural quality in how the brightness slowly falls from highlight into shadow as the face recedes in the image. It become three dimensional instead of flattened as happens with the fill on the wrong side.

If you feel that it becomes too deep in shadow toward the back of the cheeks, don't mess with the fill light, instead bring in a white reflector (not silver as it is very specular and will likely create patterns of shadow and light), and unless it is matte surface, not gold for the same reason although gold is very good for color warmth. Just use a white one on a stand and move it in slowly from the far outside until it just begins to bounce a bit of light into the deepest shadow on the side of the face.

That is basically it except that this is a starting point, not a permanent formula. Just remember that this is how these lights and their positions work for your best control for the image.

So, MK; back up the camera, use the right focal length (unless that was a creative decision) then approach your lighting from a totally new point of view based on establishing the main pattern first and then just balancing the shadow values instead of blasting that side with a second fill.

For everyone who wishes to challenge what I've pontificated here (yes, I know I am preaching very hard), try it and see what you think. Especially try it on a profile which would be the most demonstrative display of bad placement. Shoot it both ways by first setting your subject (back to the camera and facing the side with head only while leaning forward onto a table of sorts. Make sure that the shoulder is below the chin when composing so there is a clear separation.). Put your main light at 135 degrees away from the camera and then the fill on very low power at ninety degrees to the camera or....listen for it....directly in line with the nose. Shoot the image. Now do it with the fill at 45 degrees away from the camera (change NOTHING else) or, in other words, the way we all first were taught about where a fill should go.

Now move in for a tight close up and prepare to throw negative number two in the trash the second you see it. The lighting in #1 will define the lovely profile of the face with the gentle fall off of the fill sculpting the three dimensional surfaces of the head in a very subtle way, leaving the actual face in command of the portrait. The traditional fill lighting position in #2 will have you noticing ear hair, flattened cheeks, badly defined cheek bones, the lines in the corners of the eyes and mouth and any and all blemishes on the facial skin not to mention a completely flattened effect to the whole portrait. It will also bring attention to the clothing instead of the face.

Okay, to paraphrase Mark Twain on saying farewell to his audience at a theater, My fingers are tired, and your, well you are tired. So I will stop now with one further statement.

There are many things that we must be in control of in photography, but nothing that begins to be as important as our use of light and shadow to make our different statements. Enjoy the experimenting, but don't mess it up by making your lighting look confusing or ugly unless that is your goal.

[Keith Fleming]

Mkillmer,

The portraits look to me as if taken with a normal or somewhat wide angle lens. The lens is close enough to her that it distorts the portions of her face closet to the camera. Portraits traditionally have been taken with a longer-than-normal lens for that reason. Babies have flat faces, and longer lenses help reproduce that look.

Keith

[ScottPhotoCo]

Second half:

The only time that placing a fill light in an out-of-position set up may work (iffy at best) is by using an huge (60" or better) umbrella bounce so that the fill becomes omnidirectional across a very wide and soft placement including being in line with the nose. For Example, Photogenic used to make a giant horizontal fill (1970"s?) called the Skylighter(?) which was placed against the back wall of the camera room with power adjusted to the balance desired for the fill exposure. Doesn't sound like a big deal right? Just put it in the middle and blast away. No!!!!!, it could be mounted on a horizontal wall rail system so that it could be moved left or right to be in line with the nose!!!!!! One problem with that large a fill through is that it over lights the side of the face and reduces the three dimensional fall off in to shadow.

So lets further discuss a better and very manageable working process with making lighting choices. Start with the lights off to the side of the camera room and place the subject in the pose you wish. Then FIRST, bring in the main light to define facial shapes and lock it down mentally to that position. Next, bring in the fill and place it in line with the nose and adjust power for your desired exposure and contrast range. Before or after, you can place background or hair lights since they have so direct effect on the facial shadows, only on back ground/subject separation. Now study the face for two things. One is simply to notice that the fill light placement in line with the nose has another benefit besides shadow and exposure control. It also allows for a gradual fall off, a sculptural quality in how the brightness slowly falls from highlight into shadow as the face recedes in the image. It become three dimensional instead of flattened as happens with the fill on the wrong side.

If you feel that it becomes too deep in shadow toward the back of the cheeks, don't mess with the fill light, instead bring in a white reflector (not silver as it is very specular and will likely create patterns of shadow and light), and unless it is matte surface, not gold for the same reason although gold is very good for color warmth. Just use a white one on a stand and move it in slowly from the far outside until it just begins to bounce a bit of light into the deepest shadow on the side of the face.

That is basically it except that this is a starting point, not a permanent formula. Just remember that this is how these lights and their positions work for your best control for the image.

So, MK; back up the camera, use the right focal length (unless that was a creative decision) then approach your lighting from a totally new point of view based on establishing the main pattern first and then just balancing the shadow values instead of blasting that side with a second fill.

For everyone who wishes to challenge what I've pontificated here (yes, I know I am preaching very hard), try it and see what you think. Especially try it on a profile which would be the most demonstrative display of bad placement. Shoot it both ways by first setting your subject (back to the camera and facing the side with head only while leaning forward onto a table of sorts. Make sure that the shoulder is below the chin when composing so there is a clear separation.). Put your main light at 135 degrees away from the camera and then the fill on very low power at ninety degrees to the camera or....listen for it....directly in line with the nose. Shoot the image. Now do it with the fill at 45 degrees away from the camera (change NOTHING else) or, in other words, the way we all first were taught about where a fill should go.

Now move in for a tight close up and prepare to throw negative number two in the trash the second you see it. The lighting in #1 will define the lovely profile of the face with the gentle fall off of the fill sculpting the three dimensional surfaces of the head in a very subtle way, leaving the actual face in command of the portrait. The traditional fill lighting position in #2 will have you noticing ear hair, flattened cheeks, badly defined cheek bones, the lines in the corners of the eyes and moth and any and all blemishes on the facial skin not to mention a completely flattened effect to the whole portrait. It will also bring attention to the clothing instead of the face.

Okay, to paraphrase Mark Twain on saying farewell to his audience at a theater, My fingers are tired, and your, well you are tired. So I will stop now with one further statement.

There are many things that we must be in control of in photography, but nothing that begins to be as important as our use of light and shadow to make our different statements. Enjoy the experimenting, but don't mess it up by making iyour lighting look confusing or ugly unless that is your goal.





The only time that placing a fill light in an out-of-position set up may work (iffy at best) is by using an huge (60" or better) umbrella bounce so that the fill becomes omnidirectional across a very wide and soft placement including being in line with the nose. For Example, Photogenic used to make a giant horizontal fill (1970"s?) called the Skylighter(?) which was placed against the back wall of the camera room with power adjusted to the balance desired for the fill exposure. Doesn't sound like a big deal right? Just put it in the middle and blast away. No!!!!!, it could be mounted on a horizontal wall rail system so that it could be moved left or right to be in line with the nose!!!!!! One problem with that large a fill through is that it over lights the side of the face and reduces the three dimensional fall off in to shadow.

So lets further discuss a better and very manageable working process with making lighting choices. Start with the lights off to the side of the camera room and place the subject in the pose you wish. Then FIRST, bring in the main light to define facial shapes and lock it down mentally to that position. Next, bring in the fill and place it in line with the nose and adjust power for your desired exposure and contrast range. Before or after, you can place background or hair lights since they have so direct effect on the facial shadows, only on back ground/subject separation. Now study the face for two things. One is simply to notice that the fill light placement in line with the nose has another benefit besides shadow and exposure control. It also allows for a gradual fall off, a sculptural quality in how the brightness slowly falls from highlight into shadow as the face recedes in the image. It become three dimensional instead of flattened as happens with the fill on the wrong side.

If you feel that it becomes too deep in shadow toward the back of the cheeks, don't mess with the fill light, instead bring in a white reflector (not silver as it is very specular and will likely create patterns of shadow and light), and unless it is matte surface, not gold for the same reason although gold is very good for color warmth. Just use a white one on a stand and move it in slowly from the far outside until it just begins to bounce a bit of light into the deepest shadow on the side of the face.

That is basically it except that this is a starting point, not a permanent formula. Just remember that this is how these lights and their positions work for your best control for the image.

So, MK; back up the camera, use the right focal length (unless that was a creative decision) then approach your lighting from a totally new point of view based on establishing the main pattern first and then just balancing the shadow values instead of blasting that side with a second fill.

For everyone who wishes to challenge what I've pontificated here (yes, I know I am preaching very hard), try it and see what you think. Especially try it on a profile which would be the most demonstrative display of bad placement. Shoot it both ways by first setting your subject (back to the camera and facing the side with head only while leaning forward onto a table of sorts. Make sure that the shoulder is below the chin when composing so there is a clear separation.). Put your main light at 135 degrees away from the camera and then the fill on very low power at ninety degrees to the camera or....listen for it....directly in line with the nose. Shoot the image. Now do it with the fill at 45 degrees away from the camera (change NOTHING else) or, in other words, the way we all first were taught about where a fill should go.

Now move in for a tight close up and prepare to throw negative number two in the trash the second you see it. The lighting in #1 will define the lovely profile of the face with the gentle fall off of the fill sculpting the three dimensional surfaces of the head in a very subtle way, leaving the actual face in command of the portrait. The traditional fill lighting position in #2 will have you noticing ear hair, flattened cheeks, badly defined cheek bones, the lines in the corners of the eyes and moth and any and all blemishes on the facial skin not to mention a completely flattened effect to the whole portrait. It will also bring attention to the clothing instead of the face.

Okay, to paraphrase Mark Twain on saying farewell to his audience at a theater, My fingers are tired, and your, well you are tired. So I will stop now with one further statement.

There are many things that we must be in control of in photography, but nothing that begins to be as important as our use of light and shadow to make our different statements. Enjoy the experimenting, but don't mess it up by making iyour lighting look confusing or ugly unless that is your goal.

Thanks for taking the time to write this. It was quite educational. Great example of why the LFF group is awesome.

Tim
www.ScottPhoto.co

[lenser]

Thanks to you , Tim Scott.

I have been blessed by dozens of wonderful mentors in my life and career and to not try to share some of that knowledge forward seems criminal. The thanks belongs to each and every one of them as they were so kind to share their hard earned knowledge over the years.

Outstanding work on your web site, friend.

[Alessandro Bocchi]

Padua (PD) Italy - Series of portrait during the Vintage Festival with also Filippo Leonardi, Marco Pilotto, Linda De Zen and FosfeniLAB.

- Camera: Fatif Luxi Special Studio 13x18 (1959)
- Lens: Voigtlander Heliar 210 1:4.5
- Exposure: 3 second at f 4.5
- Film: HARMAN FB Direct Positive Paper - 3 ASA - size 5x7"
- Developer: ILFORD PQ UNIVERSAL 1+ 9 - 2 minutes at 20° C
- Stop: ILFORD ILFO STOP
- Fixer: ILFORD RAPID FIXER
- Lightmeter: Gossen Lunasix 3 reading the incident light.
- Lightning: 2 Continuous Light.

- Scanner: EPSON V700 and EPSON Scan 3.81
- Software: Adobe Photoshop CS4

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3668/9904918635_61988beb7f_b.jpg

[Michael W]

Padua (PD) Italy - Series of portrait during the Vintage Festival with also Filippo Leonardi, Marco Pilotto, Linda De Zen and FosfeniLAB.

- Camera: Fatif Luxi Special Studio 13x18 (1959)
- Lens: Voigtlander Heliar 210 1:4.5
- Exposure: 3 second at f 4.5
- Film: HARMAN FB Direct Positive Paper - 3 ASA - size 5x7"
- Developer: ILFORD PQ UNIVERSAL 1+ 9 - 2 minutes at 20° C
- Stop: ILFORD ILFO STOP
- Fixer: ILFORD RAPID FIXER
- Lightmeter: Gossen Lunasix 3 reading the incident light.
- Lightning: 2 Continuous Light.

- Scanner: EPSON V700 and EPSON Scan 3.81
- Software: Adobe Photoshop CS4

Splendid.

[SergeiR]

Are your beauty dishes covered by diffusion socks? If not, they would be hugely helpful in softening and diffusing the light to help eliminate the ridges of highlight you are experiencing.

could not leave this unremarked.
Socks on beauty dishes do defeat whole purpose of having beauty dish in the first place.

[Mkillmer]

...Enjoy the experimenting, but don't mess it up...
Hi Tim,
Thanks so much for the detailed lighting explanation. I'm entirely self taught and don't have much/any contact with other portrait photographers, so I really, really appreciate the time you've taken to write this. It is a very interesting and though provoking read.
I intend to start taking pictures with the ideas you have given me ASAP - I cant wait and will post back on the forum as I get results!
Thanks again for making the effort.
Very best regards,
Mark

[lenser]

SergeiR,

Could you please expand your answer on this? I am not an experienced user of Beauty Dishes, but the few times I have used them (fewer than ten), I found myself wishing for not only an efficient beam splitter, a white interior rather than the silver I was using, but also a sock in order to control what I envisioned as an overly specular light source. In fact historically, (although this is a bit smaller than a beauty dish), Photogenic set a strong precedent for this with their largest parabolic portrait reflector (at that time) in their Master series when they supplied circular clip on diffusion screens (still available) for the same purpose, to knock down specularity and control reflectivity on the skin. Please share your thoughts on this reflector and it's use.

Tim


could not leave this unremarked.
Socks on beauty dishes do defeat whole purpose of having beauty dish in the first place.

[lenser]

Hi Tim,
Thanks so much for the detailed lighting explanation. I'm entirely self taught and don't have much/any contact with other portrait photographers, so I really, really appreciate the time you've taken to write this. It is a very interesting and though provoking read.
I intend to start taking pictures with the ideas you have given me ASAP - I cant wait and will post back on the forum as I get results!
Thanks again for making the effort.
Very best regards,
Mark

Mark, you are very welcome. I guess this discourse has been waiting to jump out of me for some time and your images made me decide to let it fly so to speak. I want to strongly repeat that I highly respect your efforts here and to let you know you are off to a fine start.

I was also self taught from early high school until I opened a portrait studio at 25. I did well with it for a couple of years and thought I was making fine work until I started going to conventions and seminars and really got my eyes opened as to how a little more discipline in my lighting, and how an understanding of the real artistic and technical purpose of each light could help me accomplish much more beauty in my work. I'm into my fourth decade in this work and I am still tweaking all the time and often asking myself "why did I not do this or that" with posing or lighting to make an even better image.

If you get the chance, go to any state or regional professional photography conventions that will accept you (some allow only working pros), and search out photographic lighting seminars that may be near enough for you to attend. At both, try to latch on to mentors that you can mine for information. In my experience, it has been easy to find folks who love to share how they made any specific image and to explain the lightning they chose to use including technical details about beauty dishes, soft boxes, diffusion panels....the whole enchilada. I think that most good photographers are just born teachers at heart and can't wait to share.

Take what I have written as simply learning control over your thinking about and your placement of the fill light. Don't let it stifle you into thinking that this is a formula that is an end all way to shoot. Rather, it is a point of departure! Get comfortable with it then then let your imagination take you in new directions, saving from this only the "Key light first and fill light second" method of working and the "fill only to support the main" way of thinking. Otherwise get deep into your own creativity and keep tweaking how you decide to light the subject.

Also, I am a far cry away from the wonderful creativity levels of so many on this site, SergeiR being one of the very best. I consider myself to basically pay a LOT of attention to the lighting in whatever images I create and to have good technical control over that light, but that's about it. Study the work of everyone on this site and try to figure out their light placement. Do the same with great published images (not the crap in "People", "Us" and other pretty well snap shot oriented publications, but National Geographic, the great fashion magazines, old issues of Life magazine; and books that are out there still such as Karsh's "Portraits of a Lifetime", anything about or by George Hurrell, and "Steichen, a Life in Photography". All are dinosaurs in the current book market (check your local library), but they are about three of the greatest large format portraitists that we can study in terms of their discipline with lighting and allowing that to reveal the "soul" of the subject. You don't have to imitate them, but try to recognize and understand the placement of each light and how it effects the subject.

Good luck.

Tim

[chris_4622]

Tim,

In your example of lighting a profile the fill is in line with the nose. Is it possible to use a white reflector for the fill in this set-up?

[lenser]

Sure, Chris.

Set up the main as described but feather it slightly more toward the camera position, then place the reflector at what would have been the fill position and turn it slightly toward the main light to capture that feathered edge which will then wrap that bounced light into the face from the reflector.

If you can stay at camera position and have an assistant of some sort physically move the reflector back and forth a bit on a linear direction (out and back from you) so you can observe the optimal result of the actual fill on the face, so much the better.

If you happen to be shooting with a soft box, you can get them close enough together that they almost form a "V" shape with the main light both caressing the face from the 135 degree position and the fill wrapping the bounce light softly around the head to fall off in it's intensity as described before.

Good luck

[SergeiR]

SergeiR,

Could you please expand your answer on this? I am not an experienced user of Beauty Dishes, but the few times I have used them (fewer than ten), I found myself wishing for not only an efficient beam splitter, a white interior rather than the silver I was using, but also a sock in order to control what I envisioned as an overly specular light source. In fact historically, (although this is a bit smaller than a beauty dish), Photogenic set a strong precedent for this with their largest parabolic portrait reflector (at that time) in their Master series when they supplied circular clip on diffusion screens (still available) for the same purpose, to knock down specularity and control reflectivity on the skin. Please share your thoughts on this reflector and it's use.

Tim

About every manufacturer makes these socks, but in reality all you get with the sock is just a bit of uneven sofbox (kinda exactly opposity to dorky softboxes that made for portable strobes).
Basically well made and engineered dish got two main characteristics
- you got yourself parabolic reflector, which means there is focus point of light (unlike "parabolic umbrella" thingy by PCB, btw.. there are very few true parabolic umbrellas, and they are fiendishly expensive, cheapest and smallest is by Hensel, runs for about 100.. Big ones by Broncolor go into thousands). So while light source is soft and relatively large, its got that focused contrast (white dishes less, silver dishes more).
- you got yourself very peculiar bit - if you focus it right, that middle reflector will actually reduce just a smudge of intensity in middle. That allow you to have for example facial portrait where nose is not blown out, while it would if you use even softbox from same distance. That is why it is also very very important to get dish of right size for particular work. 14-17" ones are particularly tailored to face shots.

Typical place for focus point is between 2 to 3.5 diameters of dish (normally around 2.5 with Elinchrom for example). It really helps to have strobes with tracking modeling light, switch off all the rest of light and just move dish a bit to get a hang of where it is. That point will give you nice "punchy" shadows with very good wrapping light.

By putting sock on we essentually defeating first and nearly killing (at same distance - totally) second point of using dish. One of the most cool application of dish is actually with grid - with or without (personal preferences play huge role there) central deflector.

[SergeiR]

That said, Tim, if you just using dish to do specular highlight in the eye, to add that "glint" - easiest and most controllable way to do it - use wee snot that every system got. Or any kind of silver reflective bit in studio or behind you , with wee flash bounced off it.. But that would be indeed case when you need sock, to hide that double-ring shape away from camera.

[Professional]

Ok, i use a 22" beauty dish with my lighting, and i have a sock for it to make it soft and had that circular catch light in eyes, with a sock on the beauty dish i can get a soft light similar to softboxes or nearly shoot-thru umbrella, try it and let's see what you can get.

[SergeiR]

*sighs and digs through files*

here. Gridded beauty dish with center deflector in , on ranger quadra.
4x5, 210mm Symmar

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7179/6972919955_8a70473262_c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/sergeistudio/6972919955/)
Retro styled: Anna-1 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/sergeistudio/6972919955/) by Sergei Rodionov (http://www.flickr.com/people/sergeistudio/), on Flickr

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7037/6826802994_733f609711_c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/sergeistudio/6826802994/)
Retro styled: Anna-2 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/sergeistudio/6826802994/) by Sergei Rodionov (http://www.flickr.com/people/sergeistudio/), on Flickr

[gsinico]

really nice!

;-)
see you

[Christo.Stankulov]

LTM2000
Apo-Lanthar 150/4.5@f5.6
HP5+@1600 asa @Acufine

Just trying to take a 4x5 shot of my 21 mounts baby boy, that's why the push to 1600 asa
103196

[D-tach]

Helene

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5474/10162194824_41cefcd9cb_b.jpg

Deardorff - Cooke PS945 - FP4+ @64 in Pyrocat HD

[Christo.Stankulov]

Very nice D-Tach

[Ken Lee]

Very nice D-Tach

+ 1

[dsphotog]

Padua (PD) Italy - Series of portrait during the Vintage Festival with also Filippo Leonardi, Marco Pilotto, Linda De Zen and FosfeniLAB.

- Camera: Fatif Luxi Special Studio 13x18 (1959)
- Lens: Voigtlander Heliar 210 1:4.5
- Exposure: 3 second at f 4.5
- Film: HARMAN FB Direct Positive Paper - 3 ASA - size 5x7"
- Developer: ILFORD PQ UNIVERSAL 1+ 9 - 2 minutes at 20° C
- Stop: ILFORD ILFO STOP
- Fixer: ILFORD RAPID FIXER
- Lightmeter: Gossen Lunasix 3 reading the incident light.
- Lightning: 2 Continuous Light.

- Scanner: EPSON V700 and EPSON Scan 3.81
- Software: Adobe Photoshop CS4

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3668/9904918635_61988beb7f_b.jpg

Great quality with Ilford Direct Positive! Makes me want to try shooting some.

[SergeiR]

8x10 alum. tintype, collodion.
300m convertible Symmar (i know its not fashionable to shoot those with modern lenses, but hey..)

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3727/10371376795_68d9d5a6dd_c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/sergeistudio/10371376795/)
Watching autumn.. (http://www.flickr.com/photos/sergeistudio/10371376795/) by Sergei Rodionov (http://www.flickr.com/people/sergeistudio/), on Flickr

[Alessandro Bocchi]

Brescia - (BS) Italy - A series of portrait during the event PhotoTrace 2013. This is Gabriele Chiesa the one that organise all the event.

- Camera: LUPO Aldina II 13x18
- Lens: Voigtlander Heliar 210 1:4.5 in Compound shutter
- Exposure: 1 second betwen f 4.5 and f 6.3
- Film: HARMAN FB Direct Positive Paper - 3 ASA - size 5x7"
- Developer: ILFORD PQ UNIVERSAL 1+9 - 2 minutes at 20° C
- Stop: ILFORD ILFO STOP
- Fixer: ILFORD RAPID FIXER
- Lightmeter: Gossen Lunasix 3 reading the incident light.
- Lightning: 2 Continuous Light.

- Scanner: EPSON V700 and EPSON Scan 3.81
- Software: Adobe Photoshop CS4

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7437/10298183393_331be9d7c9_b.jpg

[Mkillmer]

Trying out some narrow-side lighting.
8x10 X-Ray
Apo-Ronar 360mm
Developed in PA Rodinal 1+50

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2880/10291007436_4996f4a450_c.jpg

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7406/10291148953_834c70f19e_c.jpg

[Tim Meisburger]

I like these a lot, but cannot get used to the ring catchlights. I think its the juxtaposition of Old Masters and modern flash.

[Emil Schildt]

(also submitted this in the paper negative thread)

Simone

11x14 paper negative.

Ilex Paragon 14" soft focus lens

http://www.apug.org/gallery1/files/4/8/8/7/simone1a.jpg

[David Schaller]

(also submitted this in the paper negative thread)

Simone


Ilex Paragon 14" soft focus lens

http://www.apug.org/gallery1/files/4/8/8/7/simone1a.jpg

This one is really great. I'd love to see it in person.
Dave

[Raffay]

My Daughter with our 1965 VW

103333
Fuji Neopan Acros 100
shot at f8, 1/8 sec
Developed in D-23 (8.17 minutes att 22 deg C), TF3 Fix (for 5 minutes)

Please comment and let me know my mistakes; composition, lighting, development etc.

Cheers

Raffay

[Michael W]

My Daughter with our 1965 VW

103333
Fuji Neopan Acros 100
shot at f8, 1/8 sec
Developed in D-23 (8.17 minutes att 22 deg C), TF3 Fix (for 5 minutes)

Please comment and let me know my mistakes; composition, lighting, development etc.

Cheers

Raffay
This is good - I like the composition, pose, light, exposure. Well done.

[Corran]

Good to see the forum back after the outage!!

Here's a shot I took during the blackout. A good friend gave me some Vericolor III film that expired in 1987. But it was kept frozen for most of that time. Seems to shoot pretty well though! I like the colors from this film.

Linhof MT, 15cm APO Lanthar:
http://www.oceanstarproductions.com/photosharing/vericolor-1744ss.jpg

[Ari]

Wonderful look! Old film and old lens coming together to make a successful image.

[Corran]

Thanks Ari!
Though I think for a lot of people here, the Lanthar is pretty "new," ha!

[life_in_sepia]

(also submitted this in the paper negative thread)

Simone

11x14 paper negative.

Ilex Paragon 14" soft focus lens

http://www.apug.org/gallery1/files/4/8/8/7/simone1a.jpg

Lovely image!

[cuypers1807]

Chamonix 045n-2
150mm
Acros
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7387/10409056165_7ce85a04e5_c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/24021575@N02/10409056165/)

[Corran]

So over the weekend there was a reunion of people who had worked or were related to the operation of the cotton mill I've been documenting (http://valdostafilm.blogspot.com/search/label/Strickland%20Mill%20-%20Remerton).

It was quite an experience. They are of course extremely saddened by the destruction of the mill.

Most interesting was how many couples were there who had actually met directly through their job at the mill, and went on to marry. Actually almost all of the folks there had met their spouse through their job. My partner and I got several shots of folks and had them tell us their stories. Right now we are thinking about part of the exhibit being portraits of these workers as well as a TV with a 5-10 minute reel of their stories and thoughts about the mill.

Anyway, here's one of the portraits I just scanned. Linhof MT, 150mm Xenotar, one flash w/ umbrella, TMY in Rodinal:

http://www.oceanstarproductions.com/photosharing/millreunion-1748ss.jpg

[jcoldslabs]

That's great, Bryan, and a really humanizing companion piece to the mill photos.

Jonathan

[Ari]

That's great, Bryan, and a really humanizing companion piece to the mill photos.

Jonathan

Couldn't have said it better; good work, Bryan.

[Corran]

Thanks, both of you.

[D-tach]

Helene

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2821/10461429114_6eb541e5f1_b.jpg

Deardorff - Imagon 250 - FP4+ 5x7 - Pyrocat HD

[Petzval Paul]

So many terrific images this month! I am trying to improve my dry plate emulsions and coating and here are two recent pics of my wife:
103503
103504
103505

The square ones are 4x75" x 4.75" and shot with a circa 1857 Palmer and Longking 1/4 plate lens wide open, about 5 seconds, and the 6" x 8" was just a B&J whole plate Tessar at f/5.6. All selenium/copper toned.

Note: I used some iodides in this mix and her tattoo is now more visible as the spectral sensitivity is extended. Cool!

[Petzval Paul]

Oh, I also have some pics up on The Light Farm blog :)

[Tobias Key]

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5475/10475158655_c0eccc2226_c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/tobykey/10475158655/)
Portrait of Becky (http://www.flickr.com/photos/tobykey/10475158655/) by Tobias Key (http://www.flickr.com/people/tobykey/), on Flickr

Trying Adox's new film.

Shot with Adox CHS 100 II and a Schneider APO Symmar 210mm.

[Jody_S]

So many terrific images this month! I am trying to improve my dry plate emulsions and coating and here are two recent pics of my wife:

103504


The square ones are 4x75" x 4.75" and shot with a circa 1857 Palmer and Longking 1/4 plate lens wide open, about 5 seconds, and the 6" x 8" was just a B&J whole plate Tessar at f/5.6. All selenium/copper toned.

Note: I used some iodides in this mix and her tattoo is now more visible as the spectral sensitivity is extended. Cool!

I like this one.

[RPippin]

103592103593103594103595Photo shoot done at a local shop here in town for a promotion. All shot with 4X5 and developed in PMK and scanned. Lots of fun for all of us. All just folks who stopped by in costume.

[bracan]

Sinar P8x10, Voigtlander Euryscop lV No.4 f6 wide open, expired Polaroid 809.

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3775/10480057293_bfd1350c1d_b.jpg

[bracan]

Sinar P8x10, Heliar 300mm f4,5 wide open, expired Polaroid 809.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7445/10479891384_25e4b0391e_h.jpg

[BrianShaw]

Trying Adox's new film.

Shot with Adox CHS 100 II and a Schneider APO Symmar 210mm.

I keep returning to look at this one. Nice... very nice.

[D-tach]

Lovely portraits Toby and Bracan!

Annemie

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2859/10482844254_74fd8b9af6_b.jpg

Deardorff - Cooke PS945 - HP5+@200 - Pyrocat HD

[jcoldslabs]

Tom, you and your Cooke just kill me! That lens is the right kind of soft. A penetrating portrait.

Jonathan

[D-tach]

Thanks Jonathan - it looks kind of smooth but you would be amazed if you look at a 100% crop of the eye, it's pretty sharp compared to a Verito or an Imagon

[jcoldslabs]

That's kind of what I mean. I really appreciate the sharpness within the glow with the Cooke. I've tried some poor man's soft focus options which work well enough for landscapes and still lifes, but for portraits having the real deal seems to be a blessing. Well, that and the skill to use it well. :)

J.

[Amedeus]

I shot these outdoors during the SoCal meet and greet a few weeks back.

Sinar P2 8x10 with Hermagis #2 Eidoscope on expired Polaroid 809 of 1992

103636103637

[bracan]

Expired Polaroid 55 negative on Speed Graphic and Aero Ektar wide open.

103657103658103659

[alanbutler57]

Expired Polaroid 55 negative on Speed Graphic and Aero Ektar wide open.

103657103658103659

Wonderful! That close up is breathtaking, such beauty captured so well!

[Raffay]

103664
My Daughter

Razzel 900, Rodenstock 127mm
Fuji Neopan Acros 100
Developed in D23

[SergeiR]

8x10 Fuji NLP , 14 inch Heliar, abrasion toning

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7333/10507027324_a7dd421019_c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/sergeistudio/10507027324/)
Artist's mother (http://www.flickr.com/photos/sergeistudio/10507027324/) by Sergei Rodionov (http://www.flickr.com/people/sergeistudio/), on Flickr

[Christo.Stankulov]

very beautiful the last tree ones.:)

Bracane, why always wide open ? :)

[bracan]

very beautiful the last tree ones.:)

Bracane, why always wide open ? :)

Thanks Christo!
Mostly because of lack of light but I preffer those crazy bokehs on old lenses.

[Emil Schildt]

Expired Polaroid 55 negative on Speed Graphic and Aero Ektar wide open.

103657103658103659

love those!

Somehow the first one reminded me of a famous Danish painting, made by J.F. Willumsen...

[Emil Schildt]

8x10 Fuji NLP , 14 inch Heliar, abrasion toning

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7333/10507027324_a7dd421019_c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/sergeistudio/10507027324/)
Artist's mother (http://www.flickr.com/photos/sergeistudio/10507027324/) by Sergei Rodionov (http://www.flickr.com/people/sergeistudio/), on Flickr

brilliant!

[alanbutler57]

8x10 Fuji NLP , 14 inch Heliar, abrasion toning

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7333/10507027324_a7dd421019_c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/sergeistudio/10507027324/)
Artist's mother (http://www.flickr.com/photos/sergeistudio/10507027324/) by Sergei Rodionov (http://www.flickr.com/people/sergeistudio/), on Flickr

Outstanding! I think Mortensen would approve!

[SergeiR]

thanks , guys :)

[D-tach]

Leentje

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7374/10519997726_6a4219ccd9_o.jpg

Deardorff - Verito 8.75" - HP5+ 5x7 - noisy scan

[Alessandro Bocchi]

Cesenatico - (FC) Italy - "Italians Gone Surfing" a Series of Portrait of Surfers, Windsurfers, Kitesurfers and also Skateboarders. Portrait of a surfer.

- Camera: TOYO-FIELD 45 AII L (Linhof)
- Lens: SCHNEIDER Symmar 150 1:5.6 Convertible
- Exposure: N/A
- Film: ILFORD FP4 - 125 ASA - size 4x5"
- Developer: KODAK HC-110 - Dilution B - 1+31 - 7 minutes and 30 seconds at 20° C
- Stop: ILFORD ILFO STOP
- Fixer: ILFORD RAPID FIXER
- Lightmeter: Gossen Lunasix 3 reading the incident light.
- Lightning: Ambient light only.

- Scanner: EPSON V700 and EPSON Scan 3.81
- Software: Adobe Photoshop CS4

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2830/10519988023_386f1a4d92_b.jpg

[Alessandro Bocchi]

Cesenatico - (FC) Italy - "Italians Gone Surfing" a Series of Portrait of Surfers, Windsurfers, Kitesurfers and also Skateboarders. Portrait of a surfer.

- Camera: TOYO-FIELD 45 AII L (Linhof)
- Lens: SCHNEIDER Symmar 150 1:5.6 Convertible
- Exposure: N/A
- Film: ILFORD FP4 - 125 ASA - size 4x5"
- Developer: KODAK HC-110 - Dilution B - 1+31 - 7 minutes and 30 seconds at 20° C
- Stop: ILFORD ILFO STOP
- Fixer: ILFORD RAPID FIXER
- Lightmeter: Gossen Lunasix 3 reading the incident light.
- Lightning: Ambient light only.

- Scanner: EPSON V700 and EPSON Scan 3.81
- Software: Adobe Photoshop CS4

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3788/10519619683_f21806df8d_b.jpg

[SergeiR]

Leentje


Deardorff - Verito 8.75" - HP5+ 5x7 - noisy scan

Sofffft :)

[D-tach]

Sofffft :)

Yesssss :)

[Bill L.]

I finally figured out how to get my Graflex RB Super D hooked up to studio lights! Test shots with my model, Ansel; focusing is a challenge given the model's attention span. Fuji FP-100c, Graflex Optar 190, One strobe with brolly box as main light and second on background.

Cheers!
Bill
103729103730

[Shac]

103664
My Daughter

Razzel 900, Rodenstock 127mm
Fuji Neopan Acros 100
Developed in D23

Lovely portait Raffay

[Raffay]

Thank you Shac.

[polyglot]

I agree. You're making wonderful progress there Raffay.

[Raffay]

Thank you, it's all because of ppl like you.

[Tobias Key]

Cesenatico - (FC) Italy - "Italians Gone Surfing" a Series of Portrait of Surfers, Windsurfers, Kitesurfers and also Skateboarders. Portrait of a surfer.

- Camera: TOYO-FIELD 45 AII L (Linhof)
- Lens: SCHNEIDER Symmar 150 1:5.6 Convertible
- Exposure: N/A
- Film: ILFORD FP4 - 125 ASA - size 4x5"
- Developer: KODAK HC-110 - Dilution B - 1+31 - 7 minutes and 30 seconds at 20° C
- Stop: ILFORD ILFO STOP
- Fixer: ILFORD RAPID FIXER
- Lightmeter: Gossen Lunasix 3 reading the incident light.
- Lightning: Ambient light only.

- Scanner: EPSON V700 and EPSON Scan 3.81
- Software: Adobe Photoshop CS4

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2830/10519988023_386f1a4d92_b.jpg

I love this picture, really makes me quite jealous!

[RHITMrB]

A self-portrait from earlier in the year, but only now post-processed.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7398/10533735856_7223f047ba_c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhitmrb/10533735856/)
Self-Portrait (http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhitmrb/10533735856/) by Isaac Sachs (http://www.flickr.com/people/rhitmrb/), on Flickr

[Alessandro Bocchi]

Thank you Tobias. I really appreciate.

[SergeiR]

Another 8x10 colour one, Fuji NLP (expired), old 300mm convertible Symmar

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3729/10518642243_24b048c6b7_c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/sergeistudio/10518642243/)
Watching autumn.. (http://www.flickr.com/photos/sergeistudio/10518642243/) by Sergei Rodionov (http://www.flickr.com/people/sergeistudio/), on Flickr

[nede]

Nice Alessandro!!!

Pol, a friend of mine
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3865384/img378.jpg

[StoneNYC]

My cousin

FOMA100 pushed to 11 minutes in Rodinal.

Toyo 45a, Schneider 150mm f/5.6 shot f/16 @ 1/125th

103756

[Mkillmer]

Felicity, an unsuspecting friend who stopped by when I had a paper negative loaded in the camera...
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7301/10535043454_fdd319675a_z.jpg
Agfa Brovira 8x10 paper
Calumet 305mm shot wide open (f6.3)

[axs810]

Cesenatico - (FC) Italy - "Italians Gone Surfing" a Series of Portrait of Surfers, Windsurfers, Kitesurfers and also Skateboarders. Portrait of a surfer.

- Camera: TOYO-FIELD 45 AII L (Linhof)
- Lens: SCHNEIDER Symmar 150 1:5.6 Convertible
- Exposure: N/A
- Film: ILFORD FP4 - 125 ASA - size 4x5"
- Developer: KODAK HC-110 - Dilution B - 1+31 - 7 minutes and 30 seconds at 20° C
- Stop: ILFORD ILFO STOP
- Fixer: ILFORD RAPID FIXER
- Lightmeter: Gossen Lunasix 3 reading the incident light.
- Lightning: Ambient light only.

- Scanner: EPSON V700 and EPSON Scan 3.81
- Software: Adobe Photoshop CS4

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2830/10519988023_386f1a4d92_b.jpg



This is an awesome portrait!

[StoneNYC]

This is an awesome portrait!

Interesting tones, nice I agree

[Mkillmer]

Ellyn in a thoughtful pose. If her hands had been relaxed I think the picture would have been more true to the mood of the subject. Just before I took the picture she tensed and as a result, looks like she is praying.
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7332/10562981266_47cd2d6308.jpg
IBF-Medix X-ray film XR-G
ISO 80 - studio strobes
Calumet 305mm f/32

[SergeiR]

Ellyn in a thoughtful pose. If her hands had been relaxed I think the picture would have been more true to the mood of the subject. Just before I took the picture she tensed and as a result, looks like she is praying.

Sorry, but intertwined fingers are a huge no-no in portraiture, unless deliberately used to convey certain things. None of those things are about thoughtfulness.

[Mkillmer]

Sorry, but intertwined fingers are a huge no-no in portraiture, unless deliberately used to convey certain things. None of those things are about thoughtfulness.

Hi Sergei,
Nothing to be sorry for!! I'm always interested in your feedback. :)

[mike rosenlof]

Sorry, but intertwined fingers are a huge no-no in portraiture, unless deliberately used to convey certain things. None of those things are about thoughtfulness.

Huh?

[StoneNYC]

Huh?

You said the was a thoughtful pose, and that poster is saying that the hands being intertwined doesn't show a thoughtful pose, thoughtful would be (to be cliche) hands under chin (the thinker) this is a prayer look, sort of..

[life_in_sepia]

Cesenatico - (FC) Italy - "Italians Gone Surfing" a Series of Portrait of Surfers, Windsurfers, Kitesurfers and also Skateboarders. Portrait of a surfer.

- Camera: TOYO-FIELD 45 AII L (Linhof)
- Lens: SCHNEIDER Symmar 150 1:5.6 Convertible
- Exposure: N/A
- Film: ILFORD FP4 - 125 ASA - size 4x5"
- Developer: KODAK HC-110 - Dilution B - 1+31 - 7 minutes and 30 seconds at 20° C
- Stop: ILFORD ILFO STOP
- Fixer: ILFORD RAPID FIXER
- Lightmeter: Gossen Lunasix 3 reading the incident light.
- Lightning: Ambient light only.

- Scanner: EPSON V700 and EPSON Scan 3.81
- Software: Adobe Photoshop CS4

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2830/10519988023_386f1a4d92_b.jpg

So so good! Bravo!

[cowanw]

Sorry, but intertwined fingers are a huge no-no in portraiture, unless deliberately used to convey certain things. None of those things are about thoughtfulness.

OK if you are Karsh with Kennedy, Gorbachev, Einstein, John Treasure, Sherman E Lee, Stowkowski or Louis Rasminsky.
Not OK if you are Alfred Cheney Johnston.
Personally I think this pose is very nicely similar to Karsh's side view of Einstein

[Ari]

I think Geddy Lee summed up Karsh's style accurately when he and his bandmates (of the group Rush (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rush_(band))) had their photo taken by Karsh for the sleeve of their 1984 album Grace Under Pressure:
"It was a typical Bar-Mitzvah photo."

[SergeiR]

Hi Sergei,
Nothing to be sorry for!! I'm always interested in your feedback. :)

There are different school of thoughts on that, apparently, but if you look at the paintings that were around for ages and masters like Steichen, Horst & etc (i.e people with concept of art in their portraits and not photojournalism) - complex backgrounds with weird patterns, interlocked fingers & etc - never used for anything but to describe issues within person, or to distract you from observing some other traits in subject, b/c loops and patterns do hold viewers eye for quite a bit, whereas your typical portrait is about subject.

Photojournalism is different kettle of fish, of course.

[RHITMrB]

I think Geddy Lee summed up Karsh's style accurately when he and his bandmates (of the group Rush (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rush_(band))) had their photo taken by Karsh for the sleeve of their 1984 album Grace Under Pressure:
"It was a typical Bar-Mitzvah photo."

Well, in this particular case (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-XaxHoUZAIac/T-_4WOyDtLI/AAAAAAAADC8/H37BeLUpzIo/s1600/Rush+-+Grace+Under+Pressure+%28inside%29.jpg), that's not far off the mark.

[Ari]

Well, in this particular case (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-XaxHoUZAIac/T-_4WOyDtLI/AAAAAAAADC8/H37BeLUpzIo/s1600/Rush+-+Grace+Under+Pressure+%28inside%29.jpg), that's not far off the mark.

In regards to Mr Karsh's body of work, I'd say it's on the mark all the time; but that's just my own opinion.
With the exception of the famous shot of Churchill, where he got lucky, he was much like any corner portrait/passport photographer of yore.

That photo really cracks me up, by the way, not in the least for the sheepish looks of all three musicians.

Anyway, back to portraits...

[lenser]

Mkillmer,

The portrait of Ellen is good, especially the lighting on the face. The entertwined fingers are no problem, but they have no connection to the rest of the portrait, so the whole absolutely erect forearm, hand, fingers thing is a big distraction. You have two perfectly vertical elements that dramatically fight each other for attention.

The only thing that needs to be done is to pull the the arms back so that the hands are along the far side of the face and only partially shown. That pulls the elements together into a cohesive union and allows the face to once again become the focal point in the image. Just make very sure that the face just touches the hands, but DOES NOT lean on the hands. If that happens, you will have ripples of distortion on the cheek, so watch that carefully. Obviously, you will need to be careful that the fingers do not throw shadows across any part of the face and adjust the lighting as needed.

The only suggestion I could have beyond that is to gently flirt a bit or tease about kids, movies, favorite foods, etc. to ease this lovely lady's mood. She is so tense in every muscle that she almost looks as though she could shatter. Even that way, she is a beautiful model, but with some relaxation, the two of you together will produce something unbeatable.

[thicktheo]

Omega View 45D, Schneider Xenar 150mm/f5.6, Fomapan 400, Diafine.

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5497/10607054454_a85d76f793_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thicktheo/10607054454/)

[dperez]

Stunning portrait! You captured her likeness beautifully.

-DP


Helene

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5474/10162194824_41cefcd9cb_b.jpg

Deardorff - Cooke PS945 - FP4+ @64 in Pyrocat HD

[AtlantaTerry]

Some of you have been discussing Karsh of Ottawa's portrait work. I am of the opinion that something changed when he moved to color. To me his color portrait photography never had the strength and impact of his black and white work.

BTW, I was very fortunate to attend a workshop Karsh held here in Atlanta in the late '70s.

I still use his techniques in some of my studio portrait work:

https://sites.google.com/site/terrythomasphotos/PolishdirectorMarekKedzierski.jpg

https://sites.google.com/site/terrythomasphotos/Patrick_Parker_v3.jpg

https://sites.google.com/site/terrythomasphotos/StevenEllisonasSandy.jpg

[cowanw]

I think you are correct in the observation that Karsh really didn't see in Colour the way he did in B&W.
Although, he first started making colour prints from slides in 1941, he did not derive "true artistic satisfaction" from colour as it did not leave anything to the viewers imagination.
He also was not fond of the magazine reproductions of his colour slides in the late 1940's (shades of the awful B&W conversion in post #122).
Colour, he said, made him the servant of the camera, vis a vis the print making.
Here are a few
http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/07/20/culture-icons-the-portraits-of-yousuf-karsh/photo/more-galleries/
Maybe his high contrast lighting was too much for the colour process and he could not alter the mid tones in the darkroom?

"Do you ever work in colour?
I prefer not to, although I often repeat a black-and-white portrait in colour if there is time. I find colour more difficult to control. It's not so easy to imprint your own artistic style on the picture. You can't change your mind, as it were. You're at the mercy of Kodak's laboratory. I think these pictures should be called Kodak reproductions, not the photographer's. If I do use colour it's usually Kodachrome or Ektachrome, most often 64 ASA."

Anyway nobody is good at everything.
Even he had a few bad B&W's that he had to publish.
Margaret Thatcher for example,4th one down
http://articulatelondon.blogspot.ca/2013/04/portraits-of-margaret-thatcher.html
the biggest pity is that both Karsh and his curators stick with the standards and we never see the many prints of ordinary people.
Like here
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/karsh/photos/index.html
No 21 in the family section are my mom's cousins.

[Hugo Zhang]

Took these few last weekend.

[pierre506]

Took these few last weekend.
Soft & great ~

[StoneNYC]

Took these few last weekend.

Love the swirls on the bokah of the first one :)

[Tri Tran]

Great model. I like the High Key softness of the #2.

[D-tach]

Stunning portrait! You captured her likeness beautifully.

-DP

Thank you